Amiga OS 4.x, is the dream over?

[ealm]

I agree 100% with Thomas Richter. OS4 and MOS fail to be both retro and modern, which makes them pointless for most people.

68k Amiga has a sentimental and historical value + lots of software. It will never be a substitute for modern OS:es but there is a big and seemingly growing retro computing market where it fits in. And it doesn't have to just get stuck in time, it can still be developed – but not with the aim of competing with Windows, MacOS, Linux, Android, iOS. The way forward for Amiga IMO is to develop and improve 68k while staying true to its nature. OS 3.2, AROS, Vampire and all expansions have a market.

Those who wants to make a system as much NG as possible while still being Amiga'ish need to re-think their strategy. MOS hasn't seen any major upgrades since 2.0 twelve years ago, and OS4 hasn't seen major upgrades since 4.1FE six years ago. Maybe OS4, MOS and AROS could co-operate on a successor to OS4 and MOS. Do the Apple/Darwin thing with an open source kernel + core parts of the OS which stays in AROS and then develop closed source interface, apps etc using whatever code useful from OS4/MOS. The core OS team would triple in size compared to current situation and the rest of the team doubles. Choose the architecture wisely – most likely ARM is the best bet being cheap, generic, widely adopted and still more than fast enough.

[jPV]

Originally Posted by Thomas Richter

Software? Which software? Os 4 does not have a large software basis.

Mainly the operating system and drivers of all kinds. OS3 was completely stuck after version 3.9, and mostly still is in the bigger scale despite some improvements lately.

And the lack of raw performance also limited possibility to write certain kind of software by anyone.. for example media players, heavier image processing, and games too.

I do not understand. How do you like to use your computer? Look at the workbench twice a day? I am sorry, but without a large software basis, I do not quite see the point in using a computer.

I continued using the same software base I had been using on my expanded RTG/AHI equipped classic Amiga. I just copied my software library from it to my first NG machine (Pegasos 1) and continued using them on much more speedy and stable machine. And then more and more MorphOS native software appeared to complement it. And it also became much more useful due the hardware and drivers the new OS provided.

Which compatibility? Can I run 68K software? Oh, in emulation, sure, but the PC can do that either, just faster, and a lot cheaper.

You're this loud without knowing how 68k software works under MorphOS and OS4? These NG operating systems emulate only the CPU, but they're otherwise compatible with OS3. You don't have to run a separate emulator which would sandbox the classic programs from the rest of the system like on PC. It's a totally different level of emulation and compatibility.

You can't see difference if you're running a PPC native or 68k program under these systems. They all look like native programs and operate in the same environment. 68k programs use the same API, libraries, etc as the PPC programs too, and they get advantage of the faster and updated system components. ARexx etc work between 68k and PPC programs and so on. You get new features to old 68k programs when, for example, MUI gets new features (no need to tell about the recent shaky MUI ports to 68k).

You can even use 68k libraries, devices, shell commands, datatypes, and other system components under the NG OS if it's missing a native version. So, actually the software base is larger on NG in this regard, because it can use both 68k and native ones.

I wouldn't know that 3.1.4 was an unreliable patch job.

It still brings improvements to very narrow areas, and won't make people stop using all the hacks and patches they have in use on their systems.

Do "which things"? The things I do can be done on the PC, faster, better, cheaper. I mean productive work. Not retro-computing. That is what the 68K line is about.

Yes, I also use real classic Amigas for retro-computing, but I still prefer NG machines for enjoying my daily computing. It's fast enough for me and no difference in price (you can find MorphOS machines for almost no cost too, I have dozen of them for different purposes or got "just in case" when came across).

Why would it need to? If I would need a modern Os, it would surely not be anything Amiga-like. Not even remotely. There are too many constructional errors in it to allow future expansion. Single-processing, no memory protection, no resource management, nothing that makes this thing even remotely interesting from an Os point of view. Neither NG nor 68K, but 68K is at least an interersting historic artefact with a huge software basis. NG is neither modern, nor useful, nor historic. So what is it good for? I do simply not understand the point.

That's your opinion and I've tried to explain my point, but what can you do...

Yes, appreciated that lots of work hours went into this, of course. But what for?

For the people like me.

I couldn't care less about Morphos either. Same problem. It has no historical value, and neither a practical value.

There's practical value for people like me, like I've tried to explain. And of course some historical value too, because I still use some old 68k software I like on it.

[jPV]

Originally Posted by ealm

OS4 and MOS fail to be both retro and modern, which makes them pointless for most people.

For me they combine the both in the way I like it.

MOS hasn't seen any major upgrades since 2.0 twelve years ago

If you take MorphOS 3.13 and compare it to MorphOS 2.0, it's a huge difference. 2.0 was a big step from 1.4.5, but it looks bigger than it is, because 1.x was still quite raw on many areas and did use 3rd party or 68k stuff quite much for things that should be integrated in OS itself, and there was such a long time between them. But for sure MorphOS has advanced much further by these steady updates since then.

[ealm]

Originally Posted by jPV

If you take MorphOS 3.13 and compare it to MorphOS 2.0, it's a huge difference. 2.0 was a big step from 1.4.5, but it looks bigger than it is, because 1.x was still quite raw on many areas and did use 3rd party or 68k stuff quite much for things that should be integrated in OS itself, and there was such a long time between them. But for sure MorphOS has advanced much further by these steady updates since then.

Yes, all releases combined MOS has developed noticeably in the last 12 years – but still very little considering it's been 12 years. I.e. it is further behind modern OS:es today than it was with the release of 2.0 12 years ago. A "modern" Amiga-like OS needs to close the gap to modern OS:es over time to have a relevant future, not widen it.

[jPV]

Originally Posted by ealm

I.e. it is further behind modern OS:es today than it was with the release of 2.0 12 years ago. A "modern" Amiga-like OS needs to close the gap to modern OS:es over time to have a relevant future, not widen it.

In which areas particularly you think the gap has widened?

[OlafSch]

Originally Posted by jPV

For me they combine the both in the way I like it.



If you take MorphOS 3.13 and compare it to MorphOS 2.0, it's a huge difference. 2.0 was a big step from 1.4.5, but it looks bigger than it is, because 1.x was still quite raw on many areas and did use 3rd party or 68k stuff quite much for things that should be integrated in OS itself, and there was such a long time between them. But for sure MorphOS has advanced much further by these steady updates since then.

Amiga (including "NG") is "retro" today

And I share the view that NG is not modern enough to attract more people because it has all the limitations from the past because otherwise the 68k integration would not work the way you like currently. We will see what will happen after ISA change to AMD64 (whenever this will be) and if the Morphos devs manage to keep the feeling you currently like.

BTW the big break should have happen from day one, NG should have been really NG and not just "OS3 running native on PPC" (to overdo a little)

Today it is too late for that in my view. The behavior of average users has changed a lot, people use devices for certain tasks and a modern OS has to adapt to different sizes like smartphone, tablet or desktop. 64bit support, full memory protection and SMP are mandatory anyway. And additional there is a lot of competition with different options as OS, countless different hardware combinations and so on. A different world.

We will see how the morphos team reacts on that and how much "amiga" feeling will be left then

[OlafSch]

Originally Posted by ealm

I agree 100% with Thomas Richter. OS4 and MOS fail to be both retro and modern, which makes them pointless for most people.

68k Amiga has a sentimental and historical value + lots of software. It will never be a substitute for modern OS:es but there is a big and seemingly growing retro computing market where it fits in. And it doesn't have to just get stuck in time, it can still be developed – but not with the aim of competing with Windows, MacOS, Linux, Android, iOS. The way forward for Amiga IMO is to develop and improve 68k while staying true to its nature. OS 3.2, AROS, Vampire and all expansions have a market.

Those who wants to make a system as much NG as possible while still being Amiga'ish need to re-think their strategy. MOS hasn't seen any major upgrades since 2.0 twelve years ago, and OS4 hasn't seen major upgrades since 4.1FE six years ago. Maybe OS4, MOS and AROS could co-operate on a successor to OS4 and MOS. Do the Apple/Darwin thing with an open source kernel + core parts of the OS which stays in AROS and then develop closed source interface, apps etc using whatever code useful from OS4/MOS. The core OS team would triple in size compared to current situation and the rest of the team doubles. Choose the architecture wisely – most likely ARM is the best bet being cheap, generic, widely adopted and still more than fast enough.

I said that years ago on a forum. All camps have the same requirements like USB support, network, RTG (with graphic card) and for a long time all were based on the 3.1 API (more or less). In my view it is a waste of resources to reinvent everything and it would make more sense to work together on the foundation and then add specific desktops and user experience.

But... I do not think there is interest and now all platforms are heading in different directions. Years ago when saying that even the "research OS" has some areas where it was more advanced than even MorphOS I got bashed by morphos users that morphos would not benefit from that because it is lightyears ahead from anything else and too good for this world

That lead to my conclusion to never propose that in future and aros should do its own thing ignoring the other camps

[OlafSch]

Originally Posted by ealm

Yes, all releases combined MOS has developed noticeably in the last 12 years – but still very little considering it's been 12 years. I.e. it is further behind modern OS:es today than it was with the release of 2.0 12 years ago. A "modern" Amiga-like OS needs to close the gap to modern OS:es over time to have a relevant future, not widen it.

in my view today it is not possible to close the gap at all

it is not only about having driver for modern graphic cards and support modern standards f.e. for 3D, people today have a lot of content in cloud solutions (Apple, Google and so on). Partly the interfaces to those clouds are closed so I do not see how that can be solved. And of course you need a modern browser who is constantly updated. That would require a lot of manpower to do, not just one time (first port) but all the time.

[ealm]

Originally Posted by jPV

In which areas particularly you think the gap has widened?

Twelve years ago what most users required was a modern web browser, a .doc-compatible word processor, a .xls-compatible spreadsheet program, a video player, a PDF viewer and a basic but modern image manipulation program. What's been added to the list of basic needs since then is all the cloud services and integration with smartphones. For example Google drive/iCloud with its connected office suite, advanced photo album applications to sync and manage everything that's shot on your smartphone, SMS integration, phone call integration, copy-n-paste between laptop and smartphone, notes app and to do lists that sync between laptop and smartphone. Etc etc.

[Fastdruid]

Originally Posted by Thomas Richter

No, it is a "missed market" understanding. The way how Os 4 is run is IMHO under the assumption of a home-computer market we had in the 1980: Provide the hardware, an Os, some documentation and users care about the rest.

I'm in agreement.

It is both. It is a missed market but it's a missed market because it's a chicken and egg scenario and as was true even in the 80's it's all about the software. No software, no one buys it, no one buys it no software.

Originally Posted by Thomas Richter

This model does not work anymore. It died around 1990.

It was on its death bed long before then. Hell it's one of the reasons the Amiga initially struggled and even before then Commodore were struggling because they were making new machines that didn't run anything that had come before and so people were starting from scratch. It took the Amiga hardware being *cheap* to get a foothold in the marketplace. Which is why RPi is popular, it's cheap and also backwards compatible as well as running loads and loads of software with relatively little effort.

Originally Posted by Thomas Richter

I really do not see a niche for Os 4 at all - not back then, not today. It simply does not address any particular need a customer may have. If I need the software and the performance, then a PC will do, including emulation. If I need retro-computing, the 68K model will do. If I need "homebrew computing", the raspi will do more than fine (at a fraction of the price).

The problem Os 4 is attempting to solve is just unclear to me.

Also in agreement. The only niche is the niche itself. It was a niche ~20 years ago. Its a vanishingly tiny niche now.

[ealm]

Originally Posted by OlafSch

in my view today it is not possible to close the gap at all

The only realistic way to do it with limited resources might be to very much deviate from the Amiga way and make an Amiga like Linux distro with a Workbench like (but more modern) window manager, UAE seemlessly integrated, maybe some Amiga API:s rewritten one by one.

That way you get all the modernities through native Linux apps, but at the same time you can Amiga'ize it step by step. At first it would probably appear like not much more than an Amiga-skinned Linux, but over time it really could be transformed. Like Android for example which has a very distinct feeling today even though it's basically Linux and macOS though it basically used to be NeXT/BSD. Many 68k MacOS users were of course furious at first, having their darling OS replaced by a clunky and incompatible UNIX system.

[daxb]

Originally Posted by utri007

I don't have a single floppy drive. You missed my point. I give a hint, what else doesn't work than old boot floppies?

I could guess now, but please tell what you mean.

[Thomas Richter]

On 3.1.4:

Originally Posted by jPV

It still brings improvements to very narrow areas, and won't make people stop using all the hacks and patches they have in use on their systems.

It was never supposed to be anything different. The point was not to come up with a new Os. The point was only to fix bugs. No more, no less.

Originally Posted by jPV

Yes, I also use real classic Amigas for retro-computing, but I still prefer NG machines for enjoying my daily computing. It's fast enough for me and no difference in price (you can find MorphOS machines for almost no cost too, I have dozen of them for different purposes or got "just in case" when came across).

For my daily computing anything Amiga-like is just unusable because all the services I need do not run on it. No difference between PPC and Amiga. There is neither the chance to catch up.

Originally Posted by jPV

There's practical value for people like me, like I've tried to explain. And of course some historical value too, because I still use some old 68k software I like on it.

There wasn't anything "practical" you mentioned, really. Sentimental, yes, I understand. But the sentimental value of the 68K is just higher. It was a stepstone of computing at its time, but the PPC did not deliver a significant way forward and did not define a milestone in the same way the 68K did.


That was nobodies fault, of course. It was just too late, and the lack of CBM being able to adapt to the changing market and changing demands.

[Fastdruid]

I see a point in 3.1.4 that I don't in 4.x. As the thread about 3.2 says, there are 35 year old bugs that are being fixed. As and when I get a ROM switcher that will fit I intend to install it to my A500+.

I can forgive 3.x a lot of things because of its age and the hardware it's been designed for and where it's come from.

I can't forgive 4.x for the same.

[jPV]

Originally Posted by Thomas Richter

On 3.1.4:

It was never supposed to be anything different. The point was not to come up with a new Os. The point was only to fix bugs. No more, no less.

Then I don't understand why you used it as an argument at the first place?

For my daily computing anything Amiga-like is just unusable because all the services I need do not run on it. No difference between PPC and Amiga. There is neither the chance to catch up.

I somehow "read between the lines" that you haven't even tried these things on MorphOS, because you don't seem to know even basic things about it. It really sounds that you're just making assumptions.

There wasn't anything "practical" you mentioned, really.

You don't think it's practical for me if I do all my daily computing on it? Well then, I don't know what to say anymore, really.

It was a stepstone of computing at its time, but the PPC did not deliver a significant way forward and did not define a milestone in the same way the 68K did.

Is there something wrong with that? What can be such a milestone anymore any case? Isn't it good enough that it makes a good continuation?

[jPV]

Originally Posted by ealm

Twelve years ago what most users required was a modern web browser, a .doc-compatible word processor, a .xls-compatible spreadsheet program, a video player, a PDF viewer and a basic but modern image manipulation program.

And most of these we already had back then, and still have.

What's been added to the list of basic needs since then is all the cloud services and integration with smartphones. For example Google drive/iCloud with its connected office suite, advanced photo album applications to sync and manage everything that's shot on your smartphone, SMS integration, phone call integration, copy-n-paste between laptop and smartphone, notes app and to do lists that sync between laptop and smartphone. Etc etc.

Do you use these SMS and phone call stuff on your desktop PC? There are drivers to mount cloud storage drives, you can use Google docs and Office 365 with the browser, etc. There are ways for the most, but of course they can be easier and snappier on mainstream platforms with direct support for everything.

[meynaf]

Originally Posted by jPV

You can even use 68k libraries, devices, shell commands, datatypes, and other system components under the NG OS if it's missing a native version. So, actually the software base is larger on NG in this regard, because it can use both 68k and native ones.

Quite a lot of 68k software touches the hardware directly and will therefore not run on a machine that doesn't have or emulate it. That makes the software base actually smaller on NG - yet on emulators such software will still run.

[jPV]

Originally Posted by meynaf

Quite a lot of 68k software touches the hardware directly and will therefore not run on a machine that doesn't have or emulate it. That makes the software base actually smaller on NG - yet on emulators such software will still run.

At least all the libaries, commands, etc that I have needed, have worked under MorphOS without problems. So it seems that this kind of stuff mostly behaves well and doesn't hit hardware.

[ealm]

Originally Posted by jPV

And most of these we already had back then, and still have.

And that's my point! The gap was smaller 12 years ago than what it is today.

Originally Posted by jPV

Do you use these SMS and phone call stuff on your desktop PC? There are drivers to mount cloud storage drives, you can use Google docs and Office 365 with the browser, etc. There are ways for the most, but of course they can be easier and snappier on mainstream platforms with direct support for everything.

Yes, for many years now I've been used to seamless integration between my phone and laptop. All phone calls, SMS:es, address book, photos I shoot, notes I make, browser tabs I keep open and even the copy-pasting I do – it's all synced between the devices. Plus of course the file management and many applications where I can start working on one device and continue on the other.

And now we're just talking the basic stuff and workflow. On top of that of course comes a lot of more niche programs that you can get for Windows/Mac/Android/iOS which you will struggle with finding an alternative for if you go MOS or OS4. Unless you have huge resources an alternative OS can only compete feature-wise if it's based on Linux or BSD (like even macOS, iOS and Android are).

[meynaf]

Originally Posted by jPV

At least all the libaries, commands, etc that I have needed, have worked under MorphOS without problems. So it seems that this kind of stuff mostly behaves well and doesn't hit hardware.

Utilities are more often OS friendly than games or demos, obviously.